Lying by telling the truth is an art that seems to be experiencing a renaissance in modern American politics. I could truthfully say that I am undefeated in MMA fighting. What that sentence would leave out is that I fought only amateur fights on private residences against either smaller or out of shape opponents. The one fight I had against someone more athletic and larger than I, I won by submission but at the cost of a broken toe.
The best, most recent example of political use of this strategy is the exchange over the Benghazi attacks between Barrack Obama and Mitt Romney during their debate. President Obama argued that he had called the Benghazi attacks an act of terror saying, “I stood in the Rose Garden and I told the American people and the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened, that this was an act of terror.” When reviewing his quote from the Rose Garden it even sounds accurate, “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.” However when reviewing the context of this one sentence it becomes more clear that President Obama is referencing general terror and the 9/11 attacks. (Full Text)
Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourned with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed. And then last night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.
As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe.
No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.
So while many people still tout that as a gotcha example of Romney getting his facts mixed up, both sides can easily argue convincingly their point of view. The President’s point of view is easily argued with narrow quotes of his speech and Romney’s can be argued with the context of this quote. These sort of political tactics are akin to arguments I have with my son which go like this.
Me: What are you doing playing video games, I grounded you.
Son: You grounded me from T.V. not video games.
Me: You’re still using the T.V. to play your games.
Son: But I’m not watching T.V.
My son is evidently a future contract lawyer which I am sure is a tough and rewarding profession. Our leaders on the other hand should not be speaking to the American public as if they are contract lawyer or petulant 8 year old. This is why when reading any source of media including sources I personally trust I always fact check entire answers, quotes, or speeches. I am not saying that media sources are all unreliable, reporters should build their articles on good research, however ultimately your learning is your own duty.
Here is an example of twisting words to frame an argument from a recent blog post at geek/law blog popehat. Ken writes innocuously, “sometimes, in court as in life, the bad guys win.” Which I can distort and argue as this:
In a rare moment of defeatism, Ken argues that the bad guys win sometimes. Under this logic Ken is giving all criminals, evil doers, and pedophiles the green light to commit their crimes because as he says “sometimes, in court as in life, the bad guys win.”
In conclusion, check your sources. Also, I invite you to turn Ken’s quote into something more sinister in my comment section.
Glenn Beck created an uproar on the internet recently by auctioning on e-Bay a Barack Obama figurine dunked in “piss” in a mason jar. Unfortunately e-Bay’s lack of humor and inability to read lead to the auction being pulled prematurely. e-Bay claimed that since the listing contained bodily fluids it could not be auctioned. Humorously the auction never contained real urine and though not required by law to respect Beck’s First Amendment rights, e-Bay should have had the spine to resist faux moral outrage generated by the left. e-Bay’s job is not to critique art, it’s job is to sell it. Beck had originally wanted to auction the piece for charity and now is left looking for another way to raise funds with his artwork.
By overreacting to this bait liberals have exposed themselves as censors as much as conservatives did during the Piss Christ episode of the 80’s. This of course was Beck’s intention and by acting in outrage, the left has show itself as easily betrayed by it’s zealotry as they claim conservatives can be. This is America where having the freedom of expression has the side affect of having to deal with other’s freedom of expression. Whoever reported Beck, and I assume it must have been a lot of people, betrayed their un-American values without Beck even breaking a sweat. “Give me liberty of give me death,” applies to freedom of expression, not just of religious conviction or political opinion.
This is a further escalation of the left and their supporters trying to censor the right for disagreeing with them. I myself found my twitter account @dese1ect in twitter gulag as many conservatives recently have. This happens by people filing complaints and mass blocking certain people for disagreeing with them. In fact it’s well documented that left wing activist encourage this activity. My only discernable reason for my account’s suspension was at the time I was communicating my support of Israel. I have no problems with people disagreeing with me, and wether your opinion makes my skin crawl or I agree with you completely, I would never try to silence your opinion. Censors are the first guard of fascism.
Another troubling issue is that certain people have apparently raised human beings such as Barrack Obama to heights held exclusively for religious idols like Jesus or Muhammad. While westerners greatly admonished Islamist reactions to the Muhammad Cartoons they seem just as willing to gnash teeth and restrict other person’s freedom over imagery of their idols if they find such expressions offensive. No man is equal to or above God, truth, liberty or justice.
On a side note, disrespecting an African American is no more racist than disrespecting a white American. Racism is the belief that one race is above another race, not disagreeing with anyone who doesn’t look like you. I have found liberals very willing to partake in accusing conservatives like Beck of racism due to their political beliefs. This further divides our country and downplays the impact of real racism.
Craig Brittain was interview by Bob Garield of “On The Media.” Amazingly he came off even less human than before, which is saying a lot for a guy that victimizes women by taking their pictures, putting them online with their email address or phone numbers, and then demands money from them to take them down. Lets take a look at Craig’s words…
The mainstream media is fueled, ratings-wise, by stories of murder, rape, violence, criminal activity and scandal. By comparison, our website is 100% objective – we post the pictures and the information as-is – we don’t speculate nor degrade nor do we shame anyone who is posted – nor do we make comments on the website – we allow the users to interpret things as they would. One of the reasons our website is so popular is that we do not tell you what to believe.
Craig lets the 10 degenerates who comment on his site any given day to interpret things like a naked woman and her phone number. They let you interpret women under the tag “Herps” which I mean, is totally up to your own interpretation right? He is such a nude revolutionist! He just wants people to be okay with their own and other people’s nude pictures all over the internet. Hell, he’s doing us a favor! He’s a Libertarian who just seeks lassiez-faire nudity right? Or is Craig just a do nothing, unimaginative, fucktard™, who still lives with his parents and can’t even monetize his pathetic porn site without resorting to extortion. Craig you are no a Libertarian, you are a borderline sociopath who is trying to hijack any label that might somehow justify you entitled perceptions to the world.
“Oh the economy is so bad, I have to trick girls into sending me their pics for my extortion porn site.” You live with your parents still, so how is that going for you? The bright lights of moral people are shining upon you, scurry like the cockroach you are. You are pathetic and you’re lucky my child or someone I know didn’t end up on your site. You are also the worse liar in the word, the internet remembers everything, including who was openly registered on domains before you got privacy registrations.
These are my opinions and mine alone. Craig if you want to handle this like men email me.
Today has seen an uptick on news coverage of the Israeli conflict with Hamas. For several days Hamas has been firing rockets into Israel, terrorizing it’s citizens while hiding in the midst of their own citizens. More than 150 rockets attacks have been perpetrated upon the Israeli people. Today Israel struck back with operation Pillar of Defense. Their first target? Ahmed al-Jabari, the head of the Hamas military. This is the difference between Israel and Hamas, Israel targets military infrastructure and leadership, Hamas randomly lobs rockets into Israel. Civilian deaths on the Palestinian side are Hamas’s fault. You don’t hide amongst your people, then cry when one gets hurt after provoking your enemy.
So many people here in America still want to defend Hamas and condemn Israel? If an armed group in Mexico or Canada was firing rockets into the United States what would those same people say? The Obama Administration has never significantly supported Israel and continues to be non comital towards Israel’s self defense. Why does this administration and a large swath of America think that Israel needs to exercise more restraint than we would?
Israel is surrounded by countries that have in the past have called for their destruction, some including Iran still do. These countries have with the Palestinians tried to wipe Israel off the map with fire. In fact they’ve tried to do it twice before on a large scale. How can we as a people living in the comfort of America condemn the Israelis for fighting for their very survival? I can’t, I won’t. I support Israel’s right to defend herself and if it we were in their place know that America would have already done far worse that the Israelis ever have. I think Hamas needs to realize something:
Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. Matthews 26:52
Israel has largely kept their sword sheathed. If things don’t change, the day will come when they fully shed their restraint. On that day Hamas will know justice.
Whenever you talk about teachers, their pay, and how they are undervalued by society, it tugs at people’s heartstrings. To think of them nurturing our youth’s minds while not being taken care of is terrible. I agree teachers do an important job and a lot of times not a very easy one. To argue that teachers are under appreciated based on their pay is logically sound. However until the Teachers Unions are dissipated there will be no true reform of their pay or our education system.
The reason why I feel this way, and you should too, is because the unions have fought tooth and nail to stop an implementation of Merit Pay. You would think that teachers would want to be paid more by simply teaching to (and beyond) expectation. You’d be wrong. The teachers unions are focused solely on one thing, tenure. They don’t care about education standards, they don’t care about your children, they don’t want to become better teachers, they want tenure. This isn’t to say teachers don’t care, but their union as a whole does not.
Tenure is a system that was meant to reward excellence, but in reality rewards mediocrity. From a self serving point of view, the goal of every professional teacher should be to gain tenure. Once tenured, teachers are hard to fire, their hours are guaranteed, they are the last to be laid off, and they get steady pay increases. Tenure is not earned through achievement but through time served. This is why linking pay and tenure to actual performance has been routinely dismissed by teachers unions.
Unless you are inherently bad at your job, wouldn’t you want to be paid based on your skill level? I would think so, most Americans think so, yet teachers unions refuse to literally put their money where their mouths are. So the question has to be, how many teachers are confident they can perform their duties acceptably? It doesn’t seem like many do.
The problem is even worse when you consider that we as a nation spend $800 billion dollars a year on our education system and we are failing to see results. Canada spends $65 billion a year and is beating us in both science and math scores. Maybe part of the reason is we can’t fire bad teachers? You hear about a teacher slapping a kindergarten student and getting suspended, not fired. There was a teacher who told students they couldn’t carry their rosary beads into class, she’s been suspended for months with pay! In the mean time her school had to hire another educator to replace her . We are throwing away good money on bad teachers, all the while we are selling our children short.
So why is this happening? It seems so simple right? It happens because $5.4 million lines a lot of politicians pockets. 95% of which goes to Democrats. Democrats who proclaim their devotion to education, but who never seem to raise the bar for our nation. It’s the vicious cycle of big government. Where inefficiency perpetually reinforces itself. If education was run like a business, teachers would be evaluated yearly. Bad teachers would be first counseled, it cost a lot to train a teacher and fixing their performance is usually cheaper than replacing them. However like all businesses, consistent under performance should mean termination. Tenure was a well meaning idea, however no one should be guaranteed a position for life. Reality dictates that people with no incentive to perform will usually under perform.
Demand merit pay. Demand accountability. Demand a return on your $800,000,000,000 yearly investment.
The Republican Party was formed shortly before the Whigs dissolved in 1860. The Northern Whigs who were abolitionist joined the Republican Party en masse. Their first presidential candidate was none other than Abraham Lincoln. Though I’ve taken Lincoln to task previously on his signing of the Revenue Act of 1861, his indomitable strength was essential in holding our Union together. His moral compass gave him the fortitude to end slavery and save the very soul of our nation. On the other hand Jefferson Davis, leader of the Confederacy, was a Democrat.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was the end of segregation in the United States. However it was predated by the Civil Rights Act of 1875 which was co-sponsored by Charles Sumner and Benjamin Franklin Butler, both Republicans. Many of it’s provisions were reenacted by the 1964 Civil Rights Act after the 1875 version was stuck down by the Supreme Court. So who voted for and against the Civil Rights Act of 1964? 66% of Democrats in Congress voted for the Civil Rights Act, and the African American hating Republicans? 80% voted for the Civil Rights Act.
So when people try to play revisionist with political attitudes towards African Americans, remember, the GOP ended slavery, and introduced or voted yes on every major civil rights bill to enter Congress. The Democrats led the Confederacy. They also split from their own party in 1948 and formed the Dixiecrats.
I do not claim to know what motivates individuals, those who I would call strangers, to make the decisions they have made. So I will not judge the people who have signed petitions to exclude their state from our Union. It may be a joke to some people, but others are taking this idea seriously. People are being lead to believe that they can live a better life by breaking their bonds with the rest of our country. Dissolving our union would not be a happy affair and would be ruinous to all involved.
- There is no such thing as a peaceful secession.
- The United States of America is a perfect union.
- Approximately 625,000 citizens died during the Civil War. 2% of the United States population.
- A similar scale today would be 6,000,000 citizens dead.
- The United States military can project it’s power across the globe, it can definitely protect it’s power within it’s own borders.
- Civil War era rifles and cannons are not similar to M-16 rifles, M1 Abrams, and F-22 Raptors.
Andrew Jackson on secession:
But each State having expressly parted with so many powers as to constitute jointly with the other States a single nation, cannot from that period possess any right to secede, because such secession does not break a league, but destroys the unity of a nation, and any injury to that unity is not only a breach which would result from the contravention of a compact, but it is an offense against the whole Union. To say that any State may at pleasure secede from the Union, is to say that the United States are not a nation because it would be a solecism to contend that any part of a nation might dissolve its connection with the other parts, to their injury or ruin, without committing any offense. Secession, like any other revolutionary act, may be morally justified by the extremity of oppression; but to call it a constitutional right, is confounding the meaning of terms, and can only be done through gross error, or to deceive those who are willing to assert a right, but would pause before they made a revolution, or incur the penalties consequent upon a failure.
Abraham Lincoln on secession:
We find the proposition that, in legal contemplation, the Union is perpetual confirmed by the history of the Union itself. The Union is much older than the Constitution. It was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was matured and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It was further matured, and the faith of all the thirteen States expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the Articles of Confederation in 1778. And, finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was “to form a more perfect Union.”
I was reading a post on the GOP in California and reflecting on what I’ve seen since the election on various conservative blogs and news sites. It is a warning to the rest of the nation’s conservatives. A lesson which the GOP has yet to learn and needs to learn now. People have been saying that they need to double down on the conservatism, fiscally I agree. However the problems alienating Americans from the GOP have nothing to do with fiscal issues, as Tuesday proved. People are concerned about their jobs, the economy, and the debt we are incurring. However they are still concerned about their and their loved ones’ pursuit of happiness. This includes things like the freedom of religion and freedom to make our own social decisions. The California Republican Party doubled down in the 90’s and is now near extinct. They took the land of Reagan and turned it into the land of Clinton and now the land of Obama.
Conservatives need to stop trying to take away the other half of the country’s liberties and start preaching a message of fiscal responsibility. This doesn’t mean conservatives abandon their social values, it means they recognize other people have different values and they don’t need to bring government in on people’s private lives. For a party that claims to be against big government they really want to regulate people’s actual lives.
Let me put it more bluntly. Either you believe the government should outlaw all things you personally find immoral, or not. Creating government regulation based on what people can do with their own bodies or in their own private lives is the ultimate creation of the Nanny State. Does the government decide what you can do in every aspect of your life or not? We cannot deplore the government’s regulation of business, insurance, and entitlement system, while begging that same government to regulate the very way people live their lives.
Once we can unite our nation on the premise that liberty was granted to all of us through our Constitution, then we can solve the big problems like $16,000,000,000,000 in debt.
Update: Also talk about a coming race war is probably not going to win elections.
So I have been following a small internet skirmish over a porn website that uses pictures of people without their consent. This happens from time to time, but what distinguishes these clowns from the rest is the fact that they put up the victim’s personal information like phone number and workplace. It’s called revenge porn, usually motivated by an unhappy ex-lover. Terrible yes, but even then it might be expected or mundane compared to some of today’s internet culture.
Further distinguishing themselves as feces posing as human beings, they seek out these women via Craigslist and Facebook using fake profiles and often times targeting women who are looking for other women. The beauty of this scheme is that online women are more trusting of other women, hence their success in obtaining nude photographs posing as potential romantic (or casual sexual) encounters. This is different than a boyfriend or girlfriend posting pictures of an ex because it’s no longer a user generated affair it’s fully under the helm of the people running the site. This removes all sorts of legal protections given to upload services like Flikr, Youtube, Instagram, Dropbox etc.
Sadly they don’t stop there. Takedown requests via email by the victims of their crimes start to flood in. It turns out when you post someone’s phone number with their nude pictures, perverts call them. What do the site administrators do? They ridicule the victims. They tell them crazy things like “you would have to get a business license and patent your pictures” in order for them to be taken down. That’s mind boggling as copyright protects pictures and patents protect ideas/inventions. The owner of the site suddenly gets an idea and begins advertising on his site Takedown Lawyer David Blade III. The idea is that if you pay this lawyer $250 he’ll get your pictures down. For some, that obviously seems like a unfortunate but reasonable expense. I know if my daughters pictures were on that site I’d pay the $250 before anyone else could see them.
Like every bad horror movie though, there’s a twist at the end. David Blade III never existed, his domain was on the same servers of the porn site, and his emails came from the same IP address as the porn site owner. This weasel decided to appropriate young girls pictures, post them online with contact information, ridicule them, and then con them out of money. He impersonated a lawyer which is a felony and the beauty of this? He never got a single legitimate advertiser on the site, so his whole business model was fraudulent.
The first income tax in American history was the Revenue Act of 1861 signed into law by Abraham Lincoln, the first Republican president of the United States of America. The Revenue Act of 1862 was the second income tax law, and the first progressive rate income tax (which means the more you make the more you’re taxed) and was signed by Abraham Lincoln. Both years were part of the 37th Congress which had a Republican majority in both houses. So the next time Republicans claim to be against taxation, remind them that they started the income tax!